1

Developing Multimedia Collaboration: The Ideas and Process of Gilgamesh

By Douglas Geers, University of Minnesota; and

Maja Cerar, Columbia University. Contact: Douglas Geers Maja Cerar Email: d@dgeers.com msc48@columbia.edu 1. Abstract

In this article we describe the collaborative process leading to the creation

of Gilgamesh, a 70-minute multimedia theater work for violin, eight channel

electroacoustic music, installation, acting/Figurenspiel, and film created in 2000-

2002 and premiered in June 2002 at the Theater an der Sihl in Zürich,

Switzerland. The cornerstones of this work are a musical composition and an

installation, both of which can stand independently but which, when combined,

become the setting and the driving force for enacting a stylized depiction of the

epic of Gilgamesh. Three dramatic agents—a violinist, computer musician, and

actor/Figurenspieler (object actor/puppeteer)—bring the world of Gilgamesh to

life by animating the objects of the installation while performing the music live. In

the following, we will trace the various stages in the collaborative creative

process of this work, from the original conception to its premiere performances.

It is our intention that documenting our process, including both its successes and

shortcomings, will provide others with insights into how they might organize

future creative collaborations. To help orient readers to the piece, a five-minute

video clip from Gilgamesh is available for viewing at

www.dgeers.com/audio/gilga.html.

2

Figure 1: Scene from Gilgamesh: Maja Cerar (left) operates character of Gilgamesh while Pippo

Siegel plays character of Enkidu. Photo: A. Lorenz/M. Neidhart

2. First Collaborations: Turnstile and Invisible Arms

The impulse towards Gilgamesh began in 1999, when we (Geers and

Cerar) worked successfully in realizing two works composed by Geers: Turnstile,

a short concert work for violin and fixed media playback, and Invisible Arms, a

multimedia work for instrumental quartet (violin, electric bass, and two

percussion), eight-channel electroacoustic music, dancers, and video. Although

both of these works were successful, the requirements of the musicians in them

was essentially conventional.

However, during rehearsals for Invisible Arms Geers learned that Cerar

also had experience performing in theatrical and dance settings, including a

staged version of Vivaldi’s Four Seasons, where she had performed the solo part

and simultaneously embodied a key role in a theatrical plot. With particular

interest to exploit Cerar’s uncommon talents, Geers convinced her to collaborate

on a third work.

3

3. Enter the Robot Orchestra: Appliance

Our third collaboration, entitled Appliance (see figure 2), was created in

the spring of 2000 with French technology artist Thomas Charveriat, through an

intense in-studio process in which all three of us were active in shaping aspects

of the final work, both visually and sonically. The result was an improvisatory

performance environment in which Cerar and several electromechanical

“sculptures” performed together, premiered in May of 2000 and successfully

played several times in New York City that year.

Figure 2: Maja Cerar performs Appliance.

(Photo by Alojz Cerar.)

The “sculptures” of Appliance consisted of several electromechanical

sound-producing objects (mechanical counters, motors, etc.) mounted into

burnished aluminum suitcases and networked to a central MIDI foot controller.

Meanwhile a lavalier microphone was attached to Cerar’s violin, and she also

wore a MIDI control glove built especially for this piece, which sent messages to

a Macintosh computer running a Max/MSP instrument that was able to play

4

samples and process the violin signal. In performance, Cerar improvised both

musically and physically, freely moving around and among the suitcase

sculptures as she improvised on her violin. In addition she used the foot

controller to activate and deactivate each suitcase, and used the control glove to

navigate among numerous settings of the MSP instrument. She was, in

essence, soloist and conductor of her own improvising robotic orchestra.

4. Gilgamesh: Conception and First Stage of Collaboration

As Appliance was being created, we began to discuss plans for a fourth

collaboration. Since Turnstile, Cerar had progressed from playing with a

completely fixed electronic part to improvising within an interactive multimedia

environment in Appliance. The next step would be to integrate interactive

performance within a more large-scale and formalized composition, also making

greater use of Cerar’s theatrical skills.

With this basic premise in place, Geers proceeded to further define the

work: Like Invisible Arms and Appliance the new work would be multimedia, as

part of his continuing desire to create immersive audience experiences and to

present music in settings other than the concert hall. However, unlike Appliance

the violinist would not be tethered to the computer by a controller glove and her

microphone would be wireless, allowing her to move more freely across the

performance space. Formally, the new piece would be based on a narrative, as

part of Geers’ interest in use of narrative structures in instrumental music, in part

to give the work a more directional shape, and in part to further Geers’ desire to

write a work that could reach out to a wider audience than usual electroacoustic

5

music aficionados. The new work would require minimal set design and cast, to

make the production as portable and affordable to mount repeatedly as possible;

it would feature elements of puppetry, fueled by Geers’ interest in Indonesian

shadow puppet performances and to increase cast flexibility; and, finally, Geers

determined that this new work would include no spoken or written text

whatsoever, in order to channel audience attention to the music and visuals (as

in ballet), and to avoid language barriers. In essence, Geers’ idea was to create

a multimedia concerto with Cerar as soloist and driving force of both a musical

composition and theatrical piece.

Given that the new work was to follow a narrative structure, it seemed

logical to begin its creation by identifying a story upon which it would be based.

After considering several stories as the foundation of the work, Geers eventually

settled upon the ancient epic of Gilgamesh. He chose Gilgamesh because of its

mythic treatment of themes of love and loss, its renown as humanity’s oldest

written story, and the fact that it originated in Mesopotamia (present day Iraq).

However, despite these positive traits, the choice of Gilgamesh for the piece also

created problems, as we discovered later in the process of creation and will

describe below.

Once Geers had chosen Gilgamesh, we both spent time reading multiple

translations of the story and commentary about it and the culture from which it

arose. Together we discussed the significance and implications of each

character and distilled from the plot the elements we found most compelling. We

trimmed a small number of scenes and characters from the original Gilgamesh

6

story to accommodate our limited cast, because we wanted to tell the story with

no use of text, and due to issues of dramatic flow and overall length. With our

research and numerous discussions in mind, Geers developed an initial draft of

musical ideas and their organization into a large-scale musical shape in

November of 2000, and during the next few months we fleshed out the first draft

of a scenario for Gilgamesh. Meanwhile, Geers also worked to develop an

interactive Max/MSP electroacoustic system for the piece, which was completed

in the spring of 2001 and which will be discussed further below.

5. The Music Composition: Fundamental Materials

The music of Gilgamesh was the genesis for the entire work, and was

designed to feature the violin performing interactively with the computer music in

a musical dialogue evocative of a concerto. The violin part was written

specifically for Ms. Cerar, whose involvement during the process of composition

was substantial.

Formally, the music of Gilgamesh is based on a harmonic syntax that

explores movement among sonic colors exhibiting varying degrees of

psychoacoustic dissonance and consonance, including the exploration of

pathways between the extremes of the continuum and transition states

connecting these. Some moments of the work sound quite consonant--even

exhibiting tonal centers--while others are dominated by various colors of "noise."

Often the two occur even simultaneously or in dialogue.

More specifically, the music was organized to traverse specific paths

through a three dimensional harmonic matrix created by the composer. The

7

construction of this system began with five "pillar chords" that act as sonic

landmarks for the piece, chosen and developed to range from being quite

consonant to highly dissonant. Each pillar chord was created by manipulating

spectral data from recordings of vocal sounds (using the software Audiosculpt

and Patchwork) and consists of 28 unique pitches, spread across a very wide

frequency range.

Once created, the pillar chords were placed in the corners and center of a

5x5 grid, and other harmonies were created to interpolate among them (using

both pitch substitutions and transpositions), filling the remaining spaces of the

grid with a total of twenty-five unique chord types (see figure 3a). This grid was

then transposed to the "tonic" of all twelve equal tempered chromatic pitches,

yielding a harmonic space of three hundred possible harmonies for the piece

(see figure 3b). These harmonies were then used to create and shape both the

violin and computer parts in Gilgamesh, and harmonic motion was achieved by

traversing this 3-D matrix in all directions (up, down, diagonally, backwards, and

forwards), including modulations to “distant” matrix locations both dramatically

and through commmon tone connections (see figure 3b).

8

Figure 3a: Basic Gilgamesh harmonic matrix: Five “pillar” chords with interpolating chords connecting them, and a hypothetical journey from pillar #4 through #3 to #1.

Z axis = matrix transposed

Figure 3b: Matrix is repeated at twelve pitch-class levels, and may be navigated in all three dimensions.

During composition, Geers made no attempt to systematically use all of

the three hundred harmonies; instead, he designed tonal centers and chord

types for many specific places in the piece to give the composition landmark

arrival points and then "navigated" the harmonic network in order to move from

each of these landmarks to the next. Since the 28-note harmonies weren’t easily

playable manually and to help visualize his chord network and his paths through

it, Geers created a Max patch that allowed him to “drive” through the chord matrix

and hear the harmonic changes in real time (see figure 4). Geers also devised a

number of patterns for stepping through the harmonic matrix, meant to enhance

the psychological state desired at different moments during the piece. However

he did not create fixed patterns or rules for traversing the harmonic matrix, as he

was particularly interested to create a compositional system that was strictly

organized but explored intuitively during the process of composition.

9

Figure 4: Interface for navigation of Gilgamesh harmonic network

6. The Computer Instrument

Returning to the concerto metaphor, the computer sounds in Gilgamesh

can be understood as taking on a role akin to that of the concerto's orchestra:

answering the violin, accompanying it, and at times even leading the music. The

computer instrument operates via a software instrument created by Geers in

Max/MSP and has three main components: live sound synthesis, live sound

processing, and cued playback of pre-composed materials. Cues are located

through the written Gilgamesh score in the form of labels at specific locations

indicating “DSP 1”, “DSP 2”, and etc. (indicating live processing and synthesis

settings) and “SF1”, “SF2”, and etc. (indicating cueing short soundfiles to play

back) (figure 5). During performance of the piece, the computer musician adjusts

parameters and behaviors at each of these designated moments to specific, pre-

composed settings.

10

Figure 5: A brief excerpt of the Gilgamesh score, including five DSP preset indicators

(DSP 32-36) and one soundfile start cue (SF 12). The computer sounds created for Gilgamesh fall generally into two

categories: synthesized events and timbral coloring (processing of violin and

synthesized materials). However, twelve different electroacoustic modules were

combined to create these, and the signal flow through the modules was

completely and constantly variable. The computer instrument modules were

additive synthesis, granular synthesis, soundfile playback (three of these), digital

delays, waveshaping, flanger, tremolo, reson filter, lowpass filter, and comb filter.

Moreover, some of the modules were connected to the MSP fiddle~ object so

that they could respond based on particular characteristics of the violin

performance. The choice of DSP modules to include in the instrument was made

to create the most rich and varied sound possible with the single G3 computer

available to us for performance at that time.

In performance, a wireless lavalier microphone is placed on the violin and

this signal is fed into the computer. The software (led by the MSP fiddle~ object)

listens to this, gathers information regarding the violin's pitch and rhythmic

patterns, and then uses this data to generate its own material in response.

However, not all is automated. As the computer musician leads the computer

11

through its "score" of activities during a performance, he has many controls on

the screen he can use to guide or tweak the computer's musical expression,

enabling subtle sonic changes and quite precise synchronizations with the violin

performance or other events onstage (figure 6a). For reasons of onscreen

aesthetics, the interface to the additive synthesis engine (to play the 28-note

harmonies mentioned above) is separated from the other modules (figure 6b).

When all modules are used together in performance, combining and processing

the synthesized harmonies and the captured violin performance data, the violin

and computer parts can always be related to each other through both gesture

and harmony.

Figure 6a: main Gilgamesh MSP performance instrument interface.

12

Figure 6b: Gilgamesh MSP interface for harmonic playback.

In order to quickly adjust numerous settings at once, an extensive system

of messaging and preset values for each audio module allows the computer

musician performing Gilgamesh to initiate a large number of simultaneous

parameter changes with a single keystroke or push of a button (see figure 7).

The computer musician can watch the notated score and increment the next

numbered DSP setting (as seen in the score excerpt above in figure 5) at

appropriate moments in the score by advancing the “DSP Presets” module of the

Max/MSP instrument. When the user hits the DSP Presets module’s “Go” button

(or the spacebar on the computer keyboard), each parameter of every audio

module is directed to change its settings to new values, interpolating from the

current values over a specified amount of time associated with that preset. To

keep the display coherent for the computer performer, all graphical interface

objects on the screen visually interpolate over the specified time to display the

new values.

13

Figure 7: Controls for Automated parameter evolution.

The use of the DSP Presets module (figure 7) means that most users will

not need to operate the myriad controls. However, if one is adept enough,

exciting improvisations can happen within the parameters of presets; and indeed,

after composing Gilgamesh Geers adapted several of the modules here for use

in his own live, completely improvised laptop performances. Meanwhile, Geers

has arranged several sections of Gilgamesh as standalone concert works, and

for these he removed the individual modules’ interfaces and replaced them with a

small number of simple controls, consisting of the DSP preset incrementing panel

(figure 7), basic audio I/O faders with labels, and an emergency mute switch so

that unfamiliar users would not become confused or intimidated.

7. Second Stage of Collaboration: Refining Concept and Music

After the essential materials of the composition had taken shape, we

began to collaborate once more, in order to further refine the musical aspects of

the piece. This work began in the summer of 2001 at the Columbia University

Computer Music Center, where we met on a regular basis to test the successful

integration of the violin writing with the Max/MSP system. During our countless

hours testing and rehearsing in the studio, Cerar provided invaluable critique and

ideas regarding both the violin material itself and the types, settings, and

14

balances of processing applied to it; and Geers worked to adjust both to increase

their effectiveness.

In addition, we collaborated to edit and amend the scenario of the

Gilgamesh story. Together we met with Peter Lewis, then the President of the

New York City Puppetry Guild. Lewis advised us that if we wanted a truly

portable work we ought to limit our cast to three: computer musician,

violinist/actor, and puppeteer/actor. We had intended to have a small cast, but

Lewis’ suggestion seemed radical. However, we soon agreed with him that this

would serve to keep the piece “lean” and relatively inexpensive. Nevertheless,

even with the use of puppetry this required further editing of the Gilgamesh story,

and we created successive new versions of the scenario, investigating ways to

simplify the story without sacrificing its core line.

At this time, several problematic attributes of the Gilgamesh story structure

became evident: The tale is quite episodic in structure (it was originally created

by combining several shorter pre-existing narratives) and some scenes are

weakly related to the main storyline. Moreover, several characters only appear in

a single scene. Given our intent to realize the story without any spoken text, this

large number of locations, situations, and characters seemed quite unwieldy. As

a result, during our editing of the narrative we decided to omit additional scenes

and characters entirely in order to focus attention on three major characters and

their relationships: King Gilgamesh, the wild man Enkidu, and the goddess Ishtar.

Of the three, the Ishtar character was the most changed from the original story, in

which she was one of a pantheon of gods. We chose to represent this pantheon

15

by the single figure of Ishtar, who became Gilgamesh’s nemesis in our piece. We

would like to note here that we also consulted with Slovene actor/puppeteer

Matjaz Loboda in late 2001, and he provided several valuable ideas for how to

present the Gilgamesh story, including elements of the expanded role of Ishtar.

8. Third Stage of Collaboration: Shaping the Theatrical and Visual

Concepts

In the fall of 2001, Cerar discussed the possibility to stage a performance

of Gilgamesh via collaboration with the Hochschule für Musik und Theater (HMT)

and the Hochschule für Gestaltung und Kunst (HGKZ) in Zürich, Switzerland with

Daniel Fueter, Director of the HMT and also a composer and musician. Mr.

Fueter agreed to produce Gilgamesh, provided a budget, and helped identify

faculty and students of the HMT with whom we might collaborate. The project

proposal was accepted in December 2001 for a performance during the summer

of 2002. In March, 2002, we traveled to Zürich to present our ideas on the piece

and consult with our collaborators. Our main collaborators were: Anne Lorenz,

visual design; Mirjam Neidhart, director; and Phillip (Pippo) Siegel,

actor/Figurenspieler.

Our March 2002 conversations and work sessions significantly altered our

ideas regarding the visual and theatrical realization of Gilgamesh, as our new

collaborators contributed their imaginations and expertise. Of these, the

following ideas were integrated into this production of Gilgamesh: First, visual

designer Anne Lorenz advocated for a stage environment that would be at least

as much an installation of art objects as a set for the narrative action. Up until

16

this moment, we had assumed that the performance would be visually related to

Indonesian puppet theater, as mentioned above. However, given our experience

and interest in performance installations such as our own piece Appliance, we

were intrigued by this possibility.

Regarding the visual aesthetic, Ms. Lorenz suggested an abstract and

minimal design, using everyday objects to symbolically embody some characters

and props: For instance, T-shirts stretched over simple frames would represent

(at various moments) the city walls, the city’s people, the trees of the forest, and

waves on the river; a hat rack would be a monster, a glove would represent a

magic plant, a sock would represent a snake, etc. (see figures 1 and 8). This

would serve our desire for a “portable” piece and would help us contain costs.

Moreover, Lorenz proposed that we and adopt an “exposed” look that did not

attempt to hide the artificiality of set pieces, costumes, and props: All pieces

would be openly exhibited through the performance, costumes would cover either

only the front or only the back of actors, movement of props would be done

openly by the two actors, and so on (see figures 1 and 11). This was not at all

what we had envisioned, but seemed to open the work up to a more

contemporary aesthetic.

17

Figure 8: violinist Maja Cerar in the Gilgamesh installation.

Photo: Alojz Cerar Next, Pippo Siegel, our Figurenspieler (puppet actor), suggested that we

use life-size figures and design them so that the actors could simultaneously

animate multiple figures. He also suggested that we consider using figures that

could function both as puppets and as costumes, so that the actors could inhabit

one and simultaneously manipulate one or more others at any moment, and then

change identities by wearing figures as his/her costume at various times during

the performance. These ideas increased the flexibility of the figures and reduced

the impression of the work being a “puppet show”, which in some circles is

assumed to be a work for children. Thus once again a collaborator had

introduced a new idea that seemed to increase the work’s sophistication. Lorenz

adapted Siegel’s ideas for our production, creating life size figures that could be

worn as costumes or be animated as free-standing objects while hanging on

18

wheeled frames (figures 1 and 9).

Figure 9: Pippo Siegel operates Gilgamesh figure (left)

while embodying Enkidu figure. Photo: A. Lorenz/M. Neidhart

Director Mirjam Neidhart suggested that, in congruence with the “exposed”

visual design style, that we also explicitly present the act of telling the Gilgamesh

narrative. Thus, our production became a dramatic interplay between three

dramatic agents, essentially the “gods” of this world, who collaborate to enact

characters and situations of the Gilgamesh epic. The piece opens with these

three agents moving through the installation, proceeds into their telling of

Gilgamesh (which in fact falters at times), and ends with them shedding their

costumes to resume their initial identities. And although we referred to them as

“gods”, these agents dressed in rather nondescript gray T-shirts and workers

pants (see figure 8), visually matching their roles as the technicians of the

Gilgamesh installation.

Neidhart also suggested that we avoid the traditional proscenium stage

orientation of audience and actors and instead place the audience on raised

19

seating on the two long walls of a long rectangular performance space, leaving

the short ends of the room for lights and placement of currently unused set

pieces (figure 10). Finally, discussions with Neidhart helped us resolve how to

present one especially tricky bit of the Gilgamesh story: When the immortal man

Utnapishtim recounts to Gilgamesh the story of the ancient flood. How could we

indicate a flashback without any spoken or printed text? With Neidhart, we

decided to tell this flashback story-within-the-story by means of a short cartoon

film (later created by artist Elisabeth Wegmann) projected onto a wheeled scrim

pulled onto and off the stage as part of the performance.

Figure 10: Stage layout for Gilgamesh performance

9. Third Stage of Collaboration: Rehearsals

On June 4, 2002, the cast and crew of Gilgamesh met at the HMT in

Zürich to begin rehearsals. Over the course of three weeks, the final form of

Gilgamesh was created through daily eight-hour (or longer) rehearsals.

During this process, the arrangement of audience and stage space (figure

10) presented a special challenge for the actor and the violinist, because every

20

movement they made needed to be considered from every angle of view.

Developing a common body language between the two stage agents happened

partly through choreographed movement and partly through a daily routine of ball

games played by the cast as rehearsal warm-ups. The games helped raise

awareness of bodies and coordinated movement in space even when the two

agents could not see each other.

As the rehearsals proceeded, set pieces, costumes, music, and action

were adjusted and completed through a very cooperative process in which Maja

Cerar, Douglas Geers, Anne Lorenz, Mirjam Neidhart, and Pippo Siegel all

suggested new ideas, most of which were tried, and some adopted. For us

(Geers and Cerar), the process of these rehearsals was quite interesting,

because its experimental method of developing the final presentation was quite

unlike the ordinary rehearsal process in classical music. In fact, it was much

more like our experiments months earlier at the Columbia Computer Music

Center, when we spent hours upon hours adjusting details of the violin part and

audio processing—Except this time our entire bodies were involved, performing

the music, moving across stage, embodying characters, etc.

Of all the elements of Gilgamesh, the music changed the least during the

Zürich rehearsals, primarily because it was seen as the foundation for the piece

around which the other elements would be fixed. Moreover, Cerar was

determined to play the entire 70-minute work from memory, and making changes

to the music made this harder for her to accomplish. Nevertheless, musical

elements did change, including significant parts for the violinist, as late as at the

21

dress rehearsal; and Cerar did play the piece from memory, except one section

of 3.5 minutes of fast and complex “battle” music, which was, not coincidentally,

the music revised at the dress rehearsal.

During the rehearsals, the greatest point of dispute among members of the

ensemble was to what degree the piece ought to depict the Gilgamesh narrative

versus only using it as a point of reference for a less direct and more symbolic

work. All parties understood that the original intent was to trace the narrative

rather symbolically rather than explicitly tell the story, but it was not easy to agree

regarding where to draw the line, especially since the piece contained no spoken

or written text. In the end, the piece clearly has a dramatic arch and characters

that interact and develop, but the reasons that things happen are not explained.

In fact, one patron who saw the work all three nights later said he found himself

intrigued but that he had wondered about the meaning of the action onstage and

interpreted it differently every night. We were satisfied by such a reaction,

because we were intending a more poetic theatrical expression.

Figure 11: Pippo Siegel (left) and Maja Cerar in Gilgamesh performance.

Photo: A. Lorenz/ M. Neidhart

22

10. Assessment of Results

Gilgamesh was performed three successive nights at the Theater an der

Sihl on June 26, 27, and 28, 2002, and received an enthusiastic review in the

Neue Zürcher Zeitung. The creative team considered the work a success, and

have since initiated work on new collaborations.

Reviewing the piece and the process of creation, a few points come to

mind that ought to be considered when embarking on future work. For instance,

Geers’ decision early in the process to make the piece inexpensive enough to

mount on tour had a major impact on what it became, affecting the script,

casting, and much of the visual design and staging. Nevertheless, it is debatable

where one ought to draw the line between practicality and ambition.

Regarding the aesthetics of the finished piece, we think that in the future

we ought to further explore the balance and boundaries between narrative and

non-narrative performance art --We want to follow our vision to new degrees of

extremity. It could be that we ought to follow the plot line even less strictly, and

create a work that does not even attempt to “tell a story” in a traditional sense but

instead offer vivid, imagistic impressions.

On a more practical level, in future works of this scope it might be

appropriate to include more improvisation for the soloist, to allow for more

theatrical flexibility and less note-for-note memorization for the musician(s). This

would also allow more in-the-moment creative input by the composer, more on-

the-spot action and reaction in the plot, and more impromptu and freely timed

expressive gestures, all of which are more common on the theater stage than on

23

a concert stage.

Moreover, it would be very beneficial in future works of this scope to have

more time for the entire collaborative group to work before rehearsals began. As

it was, we met our visual/theatrical counterparts for a few days in March and then

had to rely on email and phone communication until we returned for rehearsals in

June. This led to a feeling among some of our collaborators that the piece was

“our” project (Cerar and Geers) that they were assisting with, rather than a truly

equally collaborative project. And in fact they were correct. We chose the story,

the basic means of realizing it, and the music was the groundwork for the entire

piece. Although we felt very willing to adjust plans based on their ideas, and

know that much of the success of our performances was based on their creative

ideas and committed efforts, the fact that the visual and theater arts entered “in

the second act” so to speak gave them less power to fundamentally change the

work. In future projects, we would like to try a more integrated collaboration

again, as we did with Thomas Charveriat in Appliance.

Finally—and related to the last point—We mentioned that we enjoyed the

experimental process of rehearsals with our director, actor, and designer. It is

worth noting that in the “classical” music tradition it is generally expected that a

composer arrive at the first rehearsal with a finished score; but perhaps

composers should more often consider convening working sessions with

performers at early stages in the composition process to experiment with their

instruments and sonic combinations, or to create ensemble awareness with

musical equivalents to the ball games we played as warm ups during our

24

rehearsals for Gilgamesh.

11. Gratitude

The authors would like to express sincere thanks to the following

institutions and individuals who helped make this production possible: The

Fulbright Association, Daniel Fueter, HMT, Jøran Rudi, NoTAM, the American

Composers Forum, Bradford Garton, Fred Lerdahl, the Columbia University

Computer Music Center, Gerald Bennett, Peter Färber, Matjaz Loboda, Luke

DuBois, Peter Lewis, and the Cerar family. The music of Gilgamesh is dedicated

to the memory of Slovene puppetry legend, actor, and author Nace Simoncic.

12. Information

For more images and some audio and video clips of Gilgamesh, please

see www.gilga.org.

Bibliography Dannenberg, Roger. 1993. ``Software Design for Interactive Multimedia Performance,'' Interface - Journal of New Music Research, 22(3): 213-228. Dobrian, Christopher. 2000. MSP Manual. San Francisco: Cycling74. Gardner, John and John Maier. Gilgamesh: Translated from the Sin-Leqi- Unninni Version. New York: Random House, 1985. Kimura, Mari. 1995. "Performance Practice in Computer Music", Computer Music Journal, 19(1): 64-75. Kovacs, Maureen Gallery. 1989. The Epic of Gilgamesh. San Francisco: Stanford University Press. Lee, M. A., and D. Wessel. 1992. ‘‘Connectionist Models for Real-Time Control of Synthesis and Compositional Algorithms.’’ Proceedings of the 1992 International Computer Music Conference. San Francisco: International Computer Music Association, pp. 277–280.

25

Lerdahl, F. 2001. Tonal Pitch Space. New York: Oxford University Press. Lippe, Cort. 1997. "Real-Time Interactive Digital Signal Processing: A View of Computer Music.” Computer Music Journal 20(4): 21-24. Machover, Todd, and Joseph Chung. 1989. "Hyperinstruments: Musically Intelligent/Interactive Performance and Creativity Systems." In Proceedings of the 1989 International Computer Music Conference, ed., T. Wells and D. Butler. San Francisco: International Computer Music Association. Mason, Herbert. Gilgamesh. New York: New American Library, 1989. Puckette, Miller S., Theodore Apel, and David D. Zicarelli, 1998. “Real-Time Audio Analysis Tools for PD and MSP.” In Proceedings of the 1998 International Computer Music Conference, ed. M. Simoni. San Francisco: International Computer Music Association. Roads, C. 1996. The Computer Music Tutorial. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Rowe, Robert. 2001. Machine Musicianship. Boston: MIT Press. Wessel, D. 2002 "Live interactive computer music performance practice." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol III, Issue 5, pp. 2348-2348. Wessel, D. 1979. ‘‘Timbre Space as a Musical Control Structure.’’ Computer Music Journal 3(2): 45–52. Winkler, Todd. 2002. “Fusing Movement, Sound, and Video in Falling Up, an Interactive Dance/Theatre Production.” Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on New Instruments for Musical Expression (NIME-02), Dublin, Ireland, May 24-26, 2002. Winkler, Todd. 2000. Interactive Music: Techniques for Composing with Max. Cambridge: MIT Press. Winkler, Todd. 1995. “Strategies for Interaction: Computer Music, Performance, and Multimedia.” Proceedings of the 1995 Connecticut College Symposium on Arts and Technology. Wishart, Trevor. Audible Design. Orpheus the Pantomime, York: England, 1994.

26

Author biographies Douglas Geers is a composer who works extensively with technology in composition, performance, and multimedia collaborations. He has composed in a wide range of musical styles, including classical concert music, pop songs, television and film scores, and electroacoustic music. He earned his doctorate in music composition at Columbia University, and is now Assistant Professor of music and Director of the STRUM electronic music studios at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, where he founded and directs the annual Spark festival of Electronic Music and Art. Geers is also the founder and director of the Spark Festival of Electronic Music and Art, held each February at the University of Minnesota Arts Quarter, Minneapolis; he is a co-founder and co-Director of the Electric Music Collective, an internationally-based group of electroacoustic composer-performers; and he is a member of the electroacoustic performance group Sønreel. For more information, please see www.dgeers.com. Maja Cerar received her M.A. and M.Phil. degrees in historical musicology at Columbia University where she is currently finishing her Ph.D. dissertation (“Intertextuality and Nonlinear Structures in Schubert’s Late Quartets”), teaching Music Humanities, and serving on the editorial board of Current Musicology. Past lectures and presentations: “Performance with Live Electronics,” NYU Interactive Telecommunications Program, 2002; “Mad love for New Performance Technologies,” World Music Days Festival, Ljubljana, Slovenia 2003; “Cross-Influences of Contemporary Electroacoustic Music with Popular Electronica,” SEAMUS Conference, 2003; “Intertextuality and Non-Linear Structures in Schubert’s Late Quartets” at the conference “The Unknown Schubert: New Perspectives, New Insights,” at Luther College in Regina, Canada. Maja Cerar is also a concert violinist with a repertoire ranging from baroque to contemporary music. She has played as a soloist across Europe and the U.S., both with orchestras and in chamber music settings, and has appeared internationally on TV and CD.